Results 26 to 50 of 53
Thread: Game on in the Bitterroot.
-
07-05-2018, 02:48 PM #26I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.
"Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"
-
07-05-2018, 02:52 PM #27
-
07-05-2018, 03:10 PM #28
Are you saying that if you ran across a USFS ranger on your bike in a prohibited area they wouldn't ticket you out of fear that you could challenge the ticket in court and potentially overturn the entire the entire bike ban? That seems far-fetched.
How much enforcement actually occurs in these areas? I feel like enforcement, even as little as it is now, is only going to decline as more and more of the USFS budget is consumed by firefighting.
U.S.o.f.A.
United States of fat Asses
-
07-05-2018, 03:28 PM #29
Let me offer a little cause for hope. The Scotchman Peaks Wilderness proposal was recently put up for an advisory vote in Bonner County, where it would reside. It was represented as a very popular proposal with widespread support, but one county commissioner wanted to know for sure. The county had voted their support, but pledged to follow the result, and Senator Risch, who had brought a bill previously, promised the same. It was voted down 54/46 and of the two commissioners who were on the ballot, the supporter lost his primary and the skeptic won his. Risch has promised not to propose it again and the county commissioners have passed a resolution calling for removal of the three RW's in the panhandle and another in support of an executive order to end the practice of managing RW as wilderness. It's a start.
It's a little ironic, because the proposal had support from the local bike club and shop owners and there are no bike trails in the proposed area, but many people expressed surprise upon learning that you couldn't ride a bike in Wilderness. Most seem to have learned this by reading letters of support from the above mentioned bikers who said they supported it even though they wouldn't be allowed to ride there. A vocal group of hunters spoke out regularly about wanting to use game carts, though.
This area leans Republican, but not very hard. I think what we saw was people smelling the stench of BS from the supporters (who claimed designation wouldn't change fire fighting but would protect against mining, for example) and when faced with obvious paradoxes like no bikes or carts, while mines are good to go, it struck the anti-federal government chord and drew people out for what would otherwise have been a pretty thinly attended primary election.
The fact that Wilderness is not, as so often claimed, the gold standard of protection is something that needs to get out. Recreation Areas can offer as good or better protection thanks to broader support. Bonner County is currently at significant risk to a mine going in at one of the originally designated Wilderness Areas just upstream in Montana, (directly beneath a lake, of all things). So the fact that big W doesn't protect adequately against that may be easier to sell to people who already know that, but it only takes a small change in the political landscape to make bikes in WA's seem like a very reasonable possibility.
-
07-05-2018, 07:16 PM #30Are you saying that if you ran across a USFS ranger on your bike in a prohibited area they wouldn't ticket you out of fear that you could challenge the ticket in court and potentially overturn the entire the entire bike ban? That seems far-fetched.
Why? Because with the right legal representation you could effectively challenge, "I still don't get how WSA's must be managed as de facto wilderness. That's essentially circumventing the legislative process of congressionally mandating wilderness. IE getting wilderness designations without going through the proper steps. "
With the right counsel and $$$ you could mount a pretty good case. Especially with a history of prior use.I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.
"Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"
-
07-06-2018, 12:34 AM #31
Good info, thanks for the post.
I've heard there is not much support in Congress or senate right now for new Wilderness designation due to the controversy surrounding the push for bike access, so hopefully there will be few new areas designated in the near future, government dysfunction notwithstanding. One of the higher ups at our local bike group spoke with someone high up in the Wilderness Society at a conference recently. That guy said the WS was seriously pissed over the bike access push and will be mounting a hard push to add as much RW as possible to every forest plan amendment that comes up. We have fought new RW off somewhat effectively in the local Socal forests but can't get involved in every forest's plan amendment. Yeah, that's where IMBA is supposed to step in, but.... Which brings us back to the earlier problem of RW and WSAs being managed as Wilderness.
That is the reaction I get from most people - coworkers, non-biking friends, random people I talk to. Seems the only groups who are generally aware of no bikes in Wilderness are land managers, people who hate bikes, and people who ride bikes. Which unfortunately makes it easy to get support for Wilderness from the general public because who doesn't want to protect that killer backcountry area? And when bikes do come up, without fail the issue gets painted as the wilderness is going to get overrun by bikes, just like so many front country trail networks. Need to hammer away that there are different types of mountain bikers and only a minority of them will make the effort and enjoy riding backcountry trails in Wilderness. And always ask the haters which trails, specifically, are they concerned about. The anti-bike argument gets picked apart fast when you start talking specific trails. Get the word out!
-
07-06-2018, 06:18 AM #32
Strange bedfellows and all that, but the USFS is part of the executive branch and an executive order to end that practice would fix it. I don't think the campaign to get attention for the issue started here, but I don't know how far it's gotten yet. (Maybe someone can frame it in terms of all that tourism money that's sneaking into Canada.) The Wilderness Society would do well to consider what they stand to lose if all of the existing RW/WSA is turned back to multi-use at the stroke of a pen, though. In R1 alone that's a huge amount of land. But if this ruling holds up the strategy of pushing for RW everywhere is going to spread fast so I don't see another choice for our side. It's a shame about the fanatics at IMBA and the WS because HR1349 would instantly put us all on the same side.
Solid point. These trails are at far more risk of disappearing from disuse than overuse. We need a way to scale this so we aren't arguing about every single trail/area etc. YouTube?
-
07-06-2018, 08:03 AM #33
-
07-06-2018, 08:53 AM #34Registered User
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
- Posts
- 155
Anyone know the status of Willow Creek or Palisades? Covered in downed trees?
Thanks in advance.
-
07-06-2018, 12:38 PM #35I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.
"Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"
-
07-06-2018, 02:32 PM #36
-
07-06-2018, 02:49 PM #37
-
07-06-2018, 03:30 PM #38
Too many fucks everywhere, is why I care. Fucking cyclists.
-
07-06-2018, 07:21 PM #39
-
07-06-2018, 07:56 PM #40Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
- Livingston, MT
- Posts
- 1,785
Word. They clear very little, they maintain almost nothing depending on the district and their budget is almost non existent. We have 1 LEO for the entire Yellowstone District and he cares fuck all about bikes (he is a mountain biker himself Enforcement is a joke with the USFS.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
-
07-07-2018, 05:19 PM #41Registered User
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Location
- Southeast New York
- Posts
- 11,766
This thread was linked by the Sustainable Trails Coalition on their FB page last night. We're famous 😀
-
07-07-2018, 09:16 PM #42
yeah, fuck those guys, all they want is more access.
I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.
"Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"
-
07-09-2018, 03:39 PM #43
There are a hundred or two fewer down trees than last week. Keep your eyes open for the comment period and look to the Bitterroot Backcountry Cyclists for advise. I believe Lost Trail Bike Fest is a fundraiser for them, consider helping out any way you can or spreading the word.
In the mean time, it's game on across montana. Helena Lewis&Clark NF is in a comment period ending Sept 6th. Alternative D makes the south hills "primitive recreation", which I'm pretty sure would take out the popular Grizzly Gulch trails. Spread the word and don't let your guard down, the Hateful Old Hikers Association is everywhere!
-
07-09-2018, 04:56 PM #44
-
07-09-2018, 05:49 PM #45
-
07-09-2018, 05:51 PM #46
Game on in the Bitterroot.
This really bums me out. We spent several days last year riding in the Bitterroot and it was hands down one of our favorite trips in recent years. We’ve sort of kinda even considered moving to the area. Sheesh.
-
07-09-2018, 06:45 PM #47Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
- Livingston, MT
- Posts
- 1,785
Nice work Bitterroot Backcountry Cyclists!! Thanks for the heads up on Helena trails in jeopardy. Not sure where the Montana I grew up in went? It’s quickly becoming the state NO when it comes to recreation.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
-
07-09-2018, 07:03 PM #48Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Posts
- 2,274
Those sheds on their page were impressive. Thanks for the good work!
Know its early but definitely hitting shuttlefest this year after missing last year.
-
07-09-2018, 08:47 PM #49
http://www.kbzk.com/story/38605203/g...ss-study-areas
BOZEMAN - Representative Greg Gianforte has introduced two bills to Congress that would eliminate close to 700,000 acres of Montana land as Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs).
Back in the 1970’s, certain wildlands were designated as WSAs as a way of protecting the area without solely classifying it as wilderness. According to the Montana Wilderness Association, 44 areas in the state are classified as WSAs and are managed by the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
"The Wilderness Study Areas were not going to be with us forever, but that Congress would do its job and make a decision on all of the recommendations and work that was done,” said BLM employee Rick Waldrup.
Gianforte hopes to make these lands more accessible. He says if his two bills pass, the BLM and U.S.F.S will be able to designate the next steps for 700,000 acres of land, whether that be mining, oil drilling, logging, or only motor vehicle use.
"Well, these wilderness study areas have placed thousands of acres of land in limbo for almost forty years. So, when I got a request from the state legislature and then letters from county commissioners I knew I had to act to increase public access to our public lands,” said Gianforte.
"Absolutely it could cause a problem. If we went and looked today at some of the unspoiled country left in the lower 48, I think. And certainly a lot of these areas deserve some protection,” said Waldrup.
Others disagree with Gianforte; Beaverhead County Commissioners addressed a letter to him stating:
"The Beaverhead County Commissioners believe that the over 10 million acres of wilderness and national parks within one day’s drive of Dillon are ample in meeting ecological, environmental, and human needs for wilderness in this region. We therefore urge the agencies to forego an agenda of adding acres to wilderness for the sake of adding acres to wilderness."
The bills have made it through the initial hearing and will be put through a markup before landing on the House floor. If the bills are passed, 29 WSAs would lose protection. Gianforte says all of the areas of land he hopes to release from protection have been recommended by the BLM and U.S. Forest Service as non-suitable for wilderness.
Compromise isn't a dirty word and getting Mountain Bikers as part of the movement would be in their best interests. Gianforte is an asshole on every other issue but on this one?????
I still won't vote for him.I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.
"Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"
-
07-09-2018, 09:02 PM #50
I would eat Benny Profane's ass before I would vote for Gianforte.
Bookmarks